Problems with BIOS Update

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 01:11:09 +0000, Ardent
wrote:

X-No-Google-Sto yes

On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 03:49:08 GMT, "S.Heenan" wrote:

awdflash xxxxxxxx.bin sn/py/cc/cd/cp/LD/E will delete all old BIOS info
during a flash.
awdflash xxxxxxxx.bin /py/cc/cd/cp/LD/E will do the same and prompt
to backup the old BIOS.

Why use the Award flasher which is cryptic? You can use uniflash which
is much more informative and helpful.

http://www.rainbow-software.org/download/

It has a detailed list of chip sets it is compatible with.


Use it because it's supplied and (supposedly) guaranteed to
work?

Use it because the cryptic command line-switches are
available by typing "/?" at command line (or that they're
provided above).

Use it because uniflash has the ability to flash the wrong
EEPROM while it would be quite rare (practically unheard of)
for awardflash to do that.

Use it because it's right there, and does the job. Not even
the minor additional effort to get, learn, make boot floppy
for uniflash.

Nothing against uniflash, it does serve a useful function
for some needs but there's little point in choosing it
instead when the supplied flasher does the job fine.

"kony" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 01:11:09 +0000, Ardent
wrote:

X-No-Google-Sto yes

On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 03:49:08 GMT, "S.Heenan" wrote:

awdflash xxxxxxxx.bin sn/py/cc/cd/cp/LD/E will delete all old BIOS
info
during a flash.
awdflash xxxxxxxx.bin /py/cc/cd/cp/LD/E will do the same and
prompt
to backup the old BIOS.

Why use the Award flasher which is cryptic? You can use uniflash which
is much more informative and helpful.

http://www.rainbow-software.org/download/

It has a detailed list of chip sets it is compatible with.


Use it because it's supplied and (supposedly) guaranteed to
work?

supposedly guarenteed? could you show the 'license' where its shows that?

Use it because the cryptic command line-switches are
available by typing "/?" at command line (or that they're
provided above).

Use it because you don't want to mess with your comfort zone,
stepping out may make you insecure and fearful..................

Use it because uniflash has the ability to flash the wrong
EEPROM while it would be quite rare (practically unheard of)
for awardflash to do that.

Use it because it's right there, and does the job. Not even
the minor additional effort to get, learn, make boot floppy
for uniflash.

Nothing against uniflash,

really?

it does serve a useful function
for some needs but there's little point in choosing it
instead when the supplied flasher does the job fine.

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 07:07:02 -0700, "JAD"
wrote:


Use it because it's supplied and (supposedly) guaranteed to
work?

supposedly guarenteed? could you show the 'license' where its shows that?

Surely a little common sense will tell you that this is why
the motherboard manufacturers provide it.



Use it because the cryptic command line-switches are
available by typing "/?" at command line (or that they're
provided above).

Use it because you don't want to mess with your comfort zone,
stepping out may make you insecure and fearful..................

How about because it's the industry standard way of doing
it, that there is no need to use anything else if you
already have it.


Use it because uniflash has the ability to flash the wrong
EEPROM while it would be quite rare (practically unheard of)
for awardflash to do that.

Use it because it's right there, and does the job. Not even
the minor additional effort to get, learn, make boot floppy
for uniflash.

Nothing against uniflash,

really?

Yes, I use it myself for emergency hotflashes or some video
card moddin'. I am familiar with both and find no reason to
use it for a typical motherboard bios upgrade.

"kony" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 07:07:02 -0700, "JAD"
wrote:


Use it because it's supplied and (supposedly) guaranteed to
work?

supposedly guarenteed? could you show the 'license' where its shows that?

Surely a little common sense will tell you that this is why
the motherboard manufacturers provide it.

I want to sue then, as over the years I have had bios flashes go very bad
using it




Use it because the cryptic command line-switches are
available by typing "/?" at command line (or that they're
provided above).

Use it because you don't want to mess with your comfort zone,
stepping out may make you insecure and fearful..................

How about because it's the industry standard way of doing
it, that there is no need to use anything else if you
already have it.


industry standard, where do you dream this crap up? on the crapper
obviuosly. You would mean 'Awards standard' as they are not the only bios
manufacturer around. Far from a INDUSTRY standard.



Use it because uniflash has the ability to flash the wrong
EEPROM while it would be quite rare (practically unheard of)
for awardflash to do that.

Use it because it's right there, and does the job. Not even
the minor additional effort to get, learn, make boot floppy
for uniflash.

Nothing against uniflash,

really?

Yes, I use it myself for emergency hotflashes or some video
card moddin'. I am familiar with both and find no reason to
use it for a typical motherboard bios upgrade.

yes everyone should have software redundancy in thier system. How else would
you fill up a 320 gig hard drive?

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:30:02 -0700, "JAD"
wrote:


"kony" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 07:07:02 -0700, "JAD"
wrote:


Use it because it's supplied and (supposedly) guaranteed to
work?

supposedly guarenteed? could you show the 'license' where its shows that?

Surely a little common sense will tell you that this is why
the motherboard manufacturers provide it.

I want to sue then, as over the years I have had bios flashes go very bad
using it

Well I did write "supposedly", and I don't feel you are
guaranteed any degree of success with other alternative
flashers either, so what's the point?

It's not just that awdflash is provided by the manufacturer
but is the correct tool by the bios writer too. I never
wrote that you "have" to use it, but it seems a bit
pointless to chose something else when there is no real gain
rather than using the tool that they at least used and
intended for this very purpose.




How about because it's the industry standard way of doing
it, that there is no need to use anything else if you
already have it.


industry standard, where do you dream this crap up? on the crapper
obviuosly. You would mean 'Awards standard' as they are not the only bios
manufacturer around. Far from a INDUSTRY standard.

I mean it IS THE INDUSTRY STANDARD. The bios company wrote
it as the specific tool to flash their bios. Go to any
motherboard manufacturer whose boards have award bios. What
flasher do they provide? Uniflash? No. Awdflash or a
motherboard-rebranded version of it. That is the industry
on this planet Earth, where are you?

I do not suggest using it to flash a non-award bios, but did
anyone else? I would consider that off-topic.




Yes, I use it myself for emergency hotflashes or some video
card moddin'. I am familiar with both and find no reason to
use it for a typical motherboard bios upgrade.

yes everyone should have software redundancy in thier system. How else would
you fill up a 320 gig hard drive?

I agree about redundancy, and have practically all
awdflasher versions in multiple archives, as well as both
old and new variants of uniflash. Uniflash is great, just
not needed for a routine m'board bios flash and in that
scenario is only more time and trouble to use. Not
difficult, just relatively the wrong tool compared to the
specific tool written for the job, release by bios company
for the job, and used industry-wide for the job because they
know this, too.

"kony" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:30:02 -0700, "JAD"
wrote:


"kony" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 07:07:02 -0700, "JAD"
wrote:


Use it because it's supplied and (supposedly) guaranteed to
work?

supposedly guarenteed? could you show the 'license' where its shows
that?

Surely a little common sense will tell you that this is why
the motherboard manufacturers provide it.

I want to sue then, as over the years I have had bios flashes go very bad
using it

Well I did write "supposedly", and I don't feel you are
guaranteed any degree of success with other alternative
flashers either, so what's the point?


sorry...i want to supposedly sue................

It's not just that awdflash is provided by the manufacturer
but is the correct tool by the bios writer too. I never
wrote that you "have" to use it, but it seems a bit
pointless to chose something else when there is no real gain
rather than using the tool that they at least used and
intended for this very purpose.




How about because it's the industry standard way of doing
it, that there is no need to use anything else if you
already have it.


industry standard, where do you dream this crap up? on the crapper
obviuosly. You would mean 'Awards standard' as they are not the only bios
manufacturer around. Far from a INDUSTRY standard.

I mean it IS THE INDUSTRY STANDARD. The bios company wrote
it as the specific tool to flash their bios. Go to any
motherboard manufacturer whose boards have award bios. What
flasher do they provide? Uniflash? No. Awdflash or a
motherboard-rebranded version of it. That is the industry
on this planet Earth, where are you?

I do not suggest using it to flash a non-award bios, but did
anyone else? I would consider that off-topic.




Yes, I use it myself for emergency hotflashes or some video
card moddin'. I am familiar with both and find no reason to
use it for a typical motherboard bios upgrade.

yes everyone should have software redundancy in thier system. How else
would
you fill up a 320 gig hard drive?

I agree about redundancy, and have practically all
awdflasher versions in multiple archives, as well as both
old and new variants of uniflash. Uniflash is great, just
not needed for a routine m'board bios flash and in that
scenario is only more time and trouble to use. Not
difficult, just relatively the wrong tool compared to the
specific tool written for the job, release by bios company
for the job, and used industry-wide for the job because they
know this, too.

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 12:36:57 -0700, "JAD"
wrote:


Well I did write "supposedly", and I don't feel you are
guaranteed any degree of success with other alternative
flashers either, so what's the point?


sorry...i want to supposedly sue................

It would be nice if there were no liability on the flasher
(person), and it is troubling that motherboard manufacturers
don't provide a more automated way that doesn't rely on
windows. Even so, do you really have that many failed bios
flashes? Its' quite rare for me and I always flash to
newest bios on a board before ever installing OS or
stability testing.

I suppose if your board doesn't work right and you have no
guarantee with a flasher, you can just return the board for
refund if you find the flaw soon enough. Otherwise, sure,
it's a small risk.

JAD wrote:
"kony" wrote in message
...

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:30:02 -0700, "JAD"
wrote:


"kony" wrote in message
...

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 07:07:02 -0700, "JAD"
wrote:



Use it because it's supplied and (supposedly) guaranteed to
work?

supposedly guarenteed? could you show the 'license' where its shows
that?

Surely a little common sense will tell you that this is why
the motherboard manufacturers provide it.

I want to sue then, as over the years I have had bios flashes go very bad
using it

Well I did write "supposedly", and I don't feel you are
guaranteed any degree of success with other alternative
flashers either, so what's the point?



sorry...i want to supposedly sue................

ROTFLOL